臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在網路同儕互評活動中，同儕評量是最重要的環節，學習者或許會因專業知識的不足，在評量時無法給予有建設性的評論，而鷹架的提供可以給予學習者適時的幫助，因此，本研究旨在探討網路同儕互評活動中，提供自我參考評分鷹架與交互參考評分鷹架對學習者的學習成效與評分效度之影響。本研究以某國中一年級三個班級的學生為研究對象，授課科目為電腦課，在不打破班級建置之下，隨機選取一班為實驗組一，25人；選取一班為實驗組二，26人；最後一班為控制組，28人。進行為期11週的網路同儕互評活動。從研究結果發現：網路同儕互評具有好的效度且提供評分鷹架能提升網路同儕互評之效度，學生的學習成效也會因而提升；學生在參與網路同儕互評活動後，對於網路同儕互評之學習態度皆持正面的肯定，認為參與網路同儕互評能增加同儕間、學生與教師間之互動，提升學習動機與增加參與感，且網路同儕互評是公平的評分方式並可接受的，對於提供評分鷹架則認為在評量時更有參考依據且能獲得更多元的想法。

In the networked peer assessment environment, peer assessment is the most important part. The learner may be lack of expertise knowledge in the peer assessment let to the learner don’t give constructive feedbacks. Using scaffoldings can help the learner timely. Therefore, this study of the effect on the networked peer assessment learning achievements and validity by using the self-reference assessment scaffolding and reciprocal reference assessment scaffolding. The participants of this study, three classes students in a junior high school in Tainan enrolled in a computer course. Selected randomly one class as a experimental group 1-25 students, one class as a experimental group 2-26 students, the other one class as control group-28 students to participate in networked peer assessment for 11 weeks. The results show that using assessment scaffolding can improve networked peer assessment of validity; learners think that participated in networked peer assessment can enhance between students or students and teachers interaction, can enhance learning motivation and sense of participation, and students used the assessment scaffolding had more idea in the assessment process.

摘要 .................................................. i
ABSTRACT .......................................... ... ii
誌謝 .................................................. iii
目錄 .................................................. iv
表目錄 ................................................ vii
圖目錄 ................................................ ix
第1章 緒論 ............................................ 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 .................................... 1
1-2 研究目的 .......................................... 4
1-3 研究問題 .......................................... 4
1-4 研究限制 .......................................... 5
1-5 名詞解釋 .......................................... 6
1-6 研究架構 .......................................... 7
第2章 文獻探討......................................... 9
2-1 同儕互評 .......................................... 9
2-1-1 同儕互評之意義 .................................. 9
2-1-2 同儕互評之理論基礎 .......................... ... 10
2-1-3 網路同儕互評 .................................... 13
2-1-4 網路同儕互評之效益與待改善之處 .................. 14
2-2 鷹架理論 .......................................... 16
2-2-1 鷹架理論之意義 .................................. 16
2-2-2 近側發展區 ...................................... 16
2-2-3 鷹架理論在同儕互評上之應用 ...................... 18
第3章 研究方法 ........................................ 19
3-1 研究架構 .......................................... 19
3-2 研究對象 .......................................... 21
3-3 網路同儕互評系統 .................................. 22
3-3-1 系統之介紹 ...................................... 22
3-3-2 系統建置與課程建置 .............................. 24
3-3-3 系統測試 ........................................ 39
3-4 研究設計 .......................................... 41
3-5 研究工具 .......................................... 45
3-5-1 同儕互評評分表 .................................. 45
3-5-2網路同儕互評態度量表 ............................. 47
3-6 教學設計與實施 .................................... 50
3-7 資料處理方法 ...................................... 51
第4章 研究結果與討論 .................................. 52
4-1 樣本資料分析 ...................................... 52
4-2 信效度分析 ........................................ 53
4-2-1 信度分析 ........................................ 53
4-2-2 效度分析 ........................................ 56
4-3 學習成效分析 ...................................... 60
4-3-1 實驗組與控制組之組內學習成效分析 ................ 60
4-3-2 實驗組與控制組之組間學習成效分析 .................64
4-4 學習態度分析 ...................................... 66
4-4-1 學生對網路同儕互評之學習態度分析 ................ 66
4-4-2 學生對提供評分鷹架之學習態度分析 ................ 70
第5章 結論與建議 ...................................... 73
5-1 結論 .............................................. 73
5-2 建議 .............................................. 75
5-2-1 教學應用之參考 .................................. 75
5-2-2 未來研究之參考 .................................. 76
參考文獻 .............................................. 77
附錄一 ................................................ 84
附錄二 ................................................ 85

一、中文部分

于富雲、洪琮、劉祐興、葉家忠、陳德懷（2003）。網路出題互評瀏覽學習系統之建置與學科應用。教學科技與媒體，64，53-67。

于富雲、鄭守杰(2003)。同儕互評的理念與實踐。教育研究月刊，107，112-124。

李坤崇(1999)。多元化教學評量。台北市：心理出版社。

李新民(2001)。學校本位經營推動多元智慧教學的研究-以高雄市獅甲國小為例。未出版碩士論文，國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。

呂冠賢(2012)。導入同儕互評於數位故事創作。未出版碩士論文，國立中央大學，桃園縣。

呂曉惠(2013)。同儕互評分組機制對於國中八年級生寫作表現與動機之影響。未出版碩士論文，淡江大學，新北市。

沈慶珩、黃信義(2006)。網路同儕互評在Moodle系統上的應用。教育與圖書館學，43(3)，267-284。

卓宜青(2001)。網路化學習歷程檔案系統及同儕評量。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。

周俊龍(2004)。團體溝通機制對網路同儕互評效度影響之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立臺南師範學院，台南市。

林朝敏(2004)。網路學習歷程檔案系統中提供自動化工作日誌支援同儕互評之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立臺南師範學院，台南市。

周資娟(2006)。同儕互評應用於科學寫作之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立新竹教育大學，新竹市。

林珊如、卓宜青、劉旨峰、袁賢銘(2000)。網路化學習歷程與同儕互評系統之建構經驗。資訊與教育雜誌，80，57-64。

秦韻婷(2002)。開發線上註記分享平台輔助鷹架教學之研究。未出版碩士論文，中原大學，桃園縣。

高慧君(2003)。網路同儕互評於教學實習之成效分析。未出版碩士論文，臺灣師範大學，台北市。

徐雍智、蔡今中、陳明璋(2002)。數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計。師大學報，47，34-47。

張玉成(1995)。思考技巧與教學。台北：心理。

張靜嚳(1996)。何謂建構主義。建構與教學，3，1-4。

陳信汛(2002)。應用群集技術支援國小學童網路同儕互評之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立臺南師範學院，台南市。

陳明郎(2012)。網路同儕互評融入專題導向式學習對於學生評鑑能力之影響。未出版碩士論文，國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。

曾聖超(2004)。以網路同儕互評系統輔助高中電腦課程教學：學習成效及同儕回饋之分析。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。

黃信義(2006)。網路同儕互評對創造力的影響-以小五生電腦繪圖學習為例。未出版碩士論文，銘傳大學，桃園縣。

楊國鑫(2001)。推廣網路同儕互評系統於高級工業職業學校教學課程之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。

楊隆吉(2001)。少年小說中的同儕互動研究－以台灣省兒童文學創作獎得獎作品為例。未出版碩士論文，國立臺東師範學院，台東市。

楊龍立(1997)。建構主義教學的檢討。教育資料與研究，18，1-6。

劉旨峰(1999)。網路同儕互評系統的學生群組分析。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。

劉勝鈺(2003)。使用資訊科技學習數學：以網路同儕互評為例。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。

劉旨峰、林珊如、楊國鑫、袁賢銘(2003)。中學生與網路同儕互評之預測性研究。新竹師院學報，17，51-71。

簡茂發(1999)。多元化評量之理念與方法。教師天地，4，11-17。

二、英文部分

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Endlewood Cliffs, N. J. : Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, Nj: Prentice-Hall.

Burch, C. B. (1999). Inside the Portfolio Experience: The Student’s Perspective. English Education, 32(1), 34-49.

Bouzidi, L., & Jaillet, A. (2009). Can Online Peer Assessment Be Trusted? Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 257–268.

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J.(1996).Tools of Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Ohio:Merrill.

Chang, C. C. (2008). Enhancing Self-Perceived Effects Using Web-Based Portfolio Assessment. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1753-1771.

Chen, C. H. (2010). The Implementation and Evaluation Of A Mobile Self- And Peer-Assessment System. Computers & Education, 55(1), 229-236.

Cho, K., Schunn, C. D. & Wilson, R. W. (2006). Validity and Reliability of Scaffolded Peer Assessment of Writing From Instructor and Student Perspectives. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891-901.

Chang, C. C., & Tseng, K. H. (2009). Using A Web-Based Portfolio Assessment System to Elevate Project-Based Learning Performances. Interactive Learning Environments, 16(2), 25-37.

Chang, C. C., Tseng, K.H., & Lou, S.J. (2011). A Comparative Analysis of The Consistency And Difference Among Teacher-Assessment, Student Self-Assessment and Peer-Assessment in A Web-Based Portfolio Assessment Environment For High School Students. Computers & Education,58, 303-320.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames Of Mind. New York: Basicbooks.

Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S.(1994) Fourth Generation: Evaluation. 2369-2375. In Husen, T., & Postlethwaite, T.N.(Eds) The International Encyclogedia of Education. England: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. A. (1988). An Appropriate Conception of Teaching Science: A View From Studies of Science Learning. Science Education, 72(5), 597-614.

Isaacs, G. (1998). Brief Briefing: Peer And Self Assessment. Conference Effective Assessment At University, Brisbane, Nov.

Johnson, R. L., Mcdaniel, F., & Willeke, M. J. (2000). Using Portfolios in Program Evaluation: An Investigation of Interrater Reliability. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(1), 65-81.

Knoy, T., Lin, S. J ., Liu, Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Networked Peer Assessment in Writing: Copyeditingskills Instruction in An Esl Technical Writing Course. Proceedings of International Conference on Computers In Education. Incheon, Korea.

Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001a). Web-Based Peer Assessment: Feedback For Students With Various Thinking-Styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 420-432.

Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001b). Web-Based Peer Assessment: Relation of Attitude And Achievement. Ieee Transactions On Education, 44(2),1-13.

Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2002), Alternatives to Instructor Assessment: A Case Study of Comparing Self and Peer Assessment With Instructor Assessment Under Networked Innovative Assessment Procedures. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(4), 395-404.

Orsmond, P., Merry, S.& Reiling, K.(1996). The Importance of Marking Criteria In The Use of Peer Assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-250.

Piaget,J.(1964). Cognitive Development In Children:Development And Learning. Science Teaching And The Development of Reasoning. Karplus,R. et al.(Eds.), U. of California, Berkeley.

Piaget, J. (1970). Extracts From Piaget’S Theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Manual of Child Psychology. London:Wiley.

Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. N. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Monitoring Activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.

Solomon, J. (1987). Social Influence of the Construction of Pupils Understanding of Science. Studies In Science Education,14, 63-82.

Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-Efficacy and Education And Instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-Efficacy, Adaptation, And Aadjustment: Theory, Research, and Application . New York: Plenum Press.

Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., Chiou, S. K., & Hou, H. T. (2005). The Design and Application of A Web-Based Self And Peer-Assessment System. Computers & Education, 45, 187-202.

Sadler, P., & Good, E. (2006). The Impact of Self- and Peer-Grading on Student Learning. Educational Assessment, 11 (1), 1-31.

Topping, K. (1998). Peer Assessment Between Students In Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.

Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. E. (2001). Peer.-Assisted Learning. Jounal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113-132.

Tsai, C. C., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Developing Science Activities Through A Networked Peer Assessment System. Computer & Education, 38, 242-252.

Tsai, C. C., & Liang, J.-C. (2009). The Development of Science Activities Via On-Line Peer Assessment: The Role of Scientific Epistemological Views. Instructional Science, 37, 293-310.

Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-Line Peer Assessment and The Role of The Peer Feedback: A Study of High School Computer Course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161-1174.

Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Taiwan College Students'' Self-Efficacy and Motivation of Learning In Online Peer Assessment Environments. Internet And Higher Education,13,164-169.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind In Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Process. Cambridge, Ma: Mit Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. A. Kozulin, (Ed. And Trans.), Cambridge, Ma.: Mit Press.

Wood, Bruner, & Ross. (1976). The Role of Tutoring In Problem Solving. Journal of Psychology And Psychiatry, 7, 89-100.

Yang, Y.-F., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Conceptions of and Approaches To Learning Through Online Peer Assessment. Learning And Instruction, 20, 72-83.